[Bug 1532364] Review Request: rpcsvc-proto - RPC protocol definition

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1532364

Florian Weimer  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?   |



--- Comment #34 from Florian Weimer  ---
(In reply to Steve Dickson from comment #33)
> The koji build
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=24249811
> 
> What is it going to take to get his built package on he
> build root so nfs-utils can use it?

The build was tagged into the buildroot at the end of the task.  By default,
this happens automatically for Fedora builds.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1533801] Review Request: ghc-call-stack - GHC call-stacks backward compatibility

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1533801

Jens Petersen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||ghc-call-stack-0.1.0-4.fc28
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2018-01-17 23:47:57



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1531955] Review Request: seqan2 - C++ library of efficient algorithms and data structures

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955



--- Comment #29 from Fedora Update System  ---
seqan2-2.4.0-0.4.20180103git8a875d.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27
testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this
bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-136a004437

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1533929] Review Request: libkcapi - User space interface to the Linux Kernel Crypto API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1533929



--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System  ---
libkcapi-1.0.3-2.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-7f6e43d389

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1534747] Review Request: libblocksruntime - Development files for LLVM's Blocks runtime

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1534747

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
libblocksruntime-5.0.1-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-3047fdc1ea

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1515071] Review Request: ocaml-benchmark - Benchmarking module for OCaml

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1515071



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
ocaml-benchmark-1.4-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-6c454c0bee

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1501992] Review Request: opam - Source-based package manager for OCaml

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1501992

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 Resolution|RAWHIDE |---
   Keywords||Reopened



--- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System  ---
opam-2.0.0-0.5.beta6.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-9248f0bdff

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1531955] Review Request: seqan2 - C++ library of efficient algorithms and data structures

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #28 from Fedora Update System  ---
seqan2-2.4.0-0.4.20180103git8a875d.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26
testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this
bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-d8c7f694e9

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1533929] Review Request: libkcapi - User space interface to the Linux Kernel Crypto API

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1533929

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System  ---
libkcapi-1.0.3-2.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-f21b93a29d

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1515071] Review Request: ocaml-benchmark - Benchmarking module for OCaml

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1515071

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
ocaml-benchmark-1.4-1.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 testing repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-442d4dda8d

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1534137] Review Request: fluxcapacitor - run programs without blocking on syscalls

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1534137

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System  ---
fluxcapacitor-0-4.20180114git0b6a11b.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6
testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this
bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-ea3af33607

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1529593] Review Request: adapta-gtk-theme - An adaptive Gtk+ theme based on Material Design Guidelines

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1529593

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System  ---
adapta-gtk-theme-3.93.0.56-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-b81e1bdce9

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1529705] Review Request: adapta-backgrounds - A wallpaper collection for adapta-project

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1529705

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System  ---
adapta-backgrounds-0.5.3.1-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-95fb606a17

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1532000] Review Request: xcape - Use a modifier key as another key when pressed and released on its own

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1532000

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2018-01-17 19:03:00



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
xcape-1.2-1.20180106git6ded5b4.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1526717] Review Request: python-giacpy - Python binding for Giac

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1526717

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #7 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Well the install script includes it for a reason I suppose.

Package approved anyway.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1526717] Review Request: python-giacpy - Python binding for Giac

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1526717



--- Comment #6 from Antonio Trande  ---
Because it's unnecessary.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1482145] Review Request: python3-pyasn1 - ASN.1 tools for Python

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1482145

Carl George  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 CC||carl@george.computer
 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE
Last Closed||2018-01-17 17:13:44



--- Comment #6 from Carl George  ---
This was already released.

https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2017-b4df9f5c22

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1526717] Review Request: python-giacpy - Python binding for Giac

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1526717



--- Comment #5 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Why do you remove the CPP file instead of including it to the -devel
subpackages?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1526717] Review Request: python-giacpy - Python binding for Giac

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1526717



--- Comment #4 from Antonio Trande  ---
Spec URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/giacpy/python-giacpy.spec
SRPM URL:
https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/giacpy/python-giacpy-0.6.5-1.fc27.src.rpm

- Release 0.6.5
- Enable qcas support
- Packaging of the development files

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1532364] Review Request: rpcsvc-proto - RPC protocol definition

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1532364

Steve Dickson  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||needinfo?



--- Comment #33 from Steve Dickson  ---
The koji build
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=24249811

What is it going to take to get his built package on he
build root so nfs-utils can use it?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1535384] Review Request: tomb - a CLI tool to manage encrypted storage

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1535384



--- Comment #4 from Blaine Story  ---
I have included COPYING.txt to the %license macro and added a few files
(including the manpage) to %doc. 

There are several PDF files bundled with the upstream tarball which do deep
dives into encryption that I have opted to not include because it would
increase the RPM filesize from 57kb to several megabytes for items which are
only tangentially related to the package.

Updated SPEC and SRPM:

*
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/blainester/tomb/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00702627-tomb/tomb.spec

*
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/blainester/tomb/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00702627-tomb/tomb-2.5-4.fc28.src.rpm

Koji builds:

* https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=24249594
* https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=24249578
* https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=24249529

I'm still rather new to RPM packaging but will give what advice I can to
pending review requests.

Thank you for helping me get this far.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1534050] Review Request: python-nixio - Python bindings for NIX

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1534050



--- Comment #4 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD)  ---
Thanks for the review Raphael. I'll fix the issues and upload a new spec/srpm
set before requesting new SCM. Yeh - sure, please assign me to a review you'd
like me to do! :)

Cheers!

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1535384] Review Request: tomb - a CLI tool to manage encrypted storage

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1535384



--- Comment #3 from Iwicki Artur  ---
One thing I haven't noticed earlier is that you're not packaging the licence
text. You should include the licence (COPYING.txt) using the %license macro.
You can read more here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text

You may also consider including some files as documentation (%doc macro).
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Documentation

Another thing that's good to do is doing a scratch koji build ("koji build
--scratch") of your package and posting the result in this ticket. This way
whoever is reviewing the package can be sure it will build properly in the
Fedora build system.

Before you can get sponsored, you will also need to do some package reviews.
This does not mean doing "full" reviews, just posting some comments. You should
visit the review request queue once in a while, look for new requests, see if
you can spot any mistakes and report them (or report that everything seems
fine).

I do not have sponsor privileges, but I hope this few bits of advice will help
you on your way.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1535384] Review Request: tomb - a CLI tool to manage encrypted storage

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1535384



--- Comment #2 from Blaine Story  ---
Thank you for your fixes. I have implemented them in my COPR repo and it built
just fine.

Here are my updated SPEC and SRPM URLs:

https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/blainester/tomb/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00702599-tomb/tomb.spec

https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/blainester/tomb/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00702599-tomb/tomb-2.5-3.fc28.src.rpm

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1531955] Review Request: seqan2 - C++ library of efficient algorithms and data structures

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955



--- Comment #27 from Fedora Update System  ---
seqan2-2.4.0-0.4.20180103git8a875d.fc27 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-136a004437

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1531955] Review Request: seqan2 - C++ library of efficient algorithms and data structures

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955



--- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System  ---
seqan2-2.4.0-0.4.20180103git8a875d.fc26 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-d8c7f694e9

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1535549] Review Request: mupen64plus - Nintendo 64 Emulator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1535549

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR)



--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
I don't see you in the packager group, you probably need to find a sponsor. See
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group for
more info. Introduce yourself on the fedora-devel mailing list is also a good
idea. You should mention that you are already a packager for RPMFusion or ask
your sponsor there to also sponsor you for Fedora.


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841
[Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a
sponsor
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1535549] Review Request: mupen64plus - Nintendo 64 Emulator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1535549

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||zebo...@gmail.com



--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Not needed in Fedora:

Group:

BuildRoot:

%defattr(***, root, root) in %files


 - .desktop files must be validated in %install or %check. See
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usage

desktop-file-validate %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications/mupen64plus.desktop

 - Since you are installing icons in hicolor, you should Requires:  
hicolor-icon-theme

 - In the -devel subpackage, you should provide an unversioned shared library
file linking to libmupen64plus.so.2.0.0. Just create the symlink in %install

ln -sf %{_libdir}/libmupen64plus.so.2.0.0
%{buildroot}%{_libdir}/libmupen64plus.so

   And include it in -devel %files:

%files devel
%{_includedir}/mupen64plus/
%{_libdir}/libmupen64plus.so

 - There's various LICENSES files included in the source, add them all to
%license. In order not to overwrite the same file, you need to rename them
first.

   In %prep:

cp -a source/mupen64plus-rsp-hle/LICENSES LICENSE-rsp-hle
cp -a source/mupen64plus-rom/mupen64plus/assets/LICENSES LICENSE-assets
cp -a source/mupen64plus-rom/LICENSES LICENSE-rom
cp -a source/mupen64plus-input-sdl/LICENSES LICENSE-input-sdl
cp -a source/mupen64plus-video-glide64mk2/LICENSES LICENSE-video-glide64mk2
cp -a source/mupen64plus-video-rice/LICENSES LICENSE-video-rice
cp -a source/mupen64plus-ui-console/LICENSES LICENSE-ui-console
cp -a source/mupen64plus-core/LICENSES LICENSE-core
cp -a source/mupen64plus-audio-sdl/LICENSES LICENSE-audio-sdl

  In %files:

%files
%license LICENSE-rsp-hle LICENSE-assets LICENSE-rom LICENSE-input-sdl
LICENSE-video-glide64mk2 LICENSE-video-rice LICENSE-core LICENSE-audio-sdl

 - The assets in source/mupen64plus-rom/mupen64plus/assets/ are actually
Creative Common Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0, so you should add that license to
the License: field:

License:GPLv2+ and CC-BY-SA

 - Since you're including a shared library, you must run ldconfig in %post and
%postun:

%post -p /sbin/ldconfig

%postun -p /sbin/ldconfig

   See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Shared_Libraries

 - You should own this directory: /usr/lib64/mupen64plus :

%dir %{_libdir}/%{name}

 - In the %changelog, put a space before the version info, otherwise it's not
recognized correctly:

* Thu Jan 11 2018 Wade Berrier  - 2.5-2

 - Use pkgconfig for your devel deps when you can:

BuildRequires:pkgconfig(SDL_ttf)
BuildRequires:pkgconfig(lirc)
BuildRequires:desktop-file-utils
BuildRequires:pkgconfig(glu)
BuildRequires:pkgconfig(samplerate)
BuildRequires:pkgconfig(libpng)
BuildRequires:pkgconfig(sdl)
BuildRequires:pkgconfig(freetype2)
BuildRequires:boost-devel
BuildRequires:gzip
BuildRequires:pkgconfig(glew)
BuildRequires:binutils



Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
===
- ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
  Note: /sbin/ldconfig not called in mupen64plus
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Shared_Libraries
- Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-
  file-validate if there is such a file.


= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[!]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
 attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "GPL", "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated", "MIT/X11
 (BSD like)", "zlib/libpng", "BSD (2 clause)", "GPL (v2 or later) (with
 incorrect FSF address)", "GPL (with incorrect FSF address)", "LGPL
 (v2.1 or later)", "BSD (3 clause) GPL (v2 or later)", "GPL (v2)". 119
 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/bob/packaging/review/mupen64plus/review-
 mupen64plus/licensecheck.txt
[!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
 Note: No known owner 

[Bug 1533719] Review Request: twolame - Optimized MPEG Audio Layer 2 encoding library based on tooLAME

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1533719

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2018-01-17 11:20:21



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
twolame-0.3.13-9.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1533801] Review Request: ghc-call-stack - GHC call-stacks backward compatibility

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1533801



--- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ghc-call-stack. You may commit to the branch
"f27" in about 10 minutes.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1535549] New: Review Request: mupen64plus - Nintendo 64 Emulator

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1535549

Bug ID: 1535549
   Summary: Review Request: mupen64plus - Nintendo 64 Emulator
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Severity: medium
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: wberr...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



Spec URL: http://berrier.org/tmp/mupen64plus.spec
SRPM URL: http://berrier.org/tmp/mupen64plus-2.5-2.fc27.src.rpm
Description: Nintendo 64 Emulator
Fedora Account System Username: wberrier

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1501992] Review Request: opam - Source-based package manager for OCaml

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1501992



--- Comment #21 from Ben Rosser  ---
opam is built for F27. Building for F26 may take a bit longer as the updates
for dose3 and re only just got pushed to testing.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1529705] Review Request: adapta-backgrounds - A wallpaper collection for adapta-project

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1529705

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |MODIFIED



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1529705] Review Request: adapta-backgrounds - A wallpaper collection for adapta-project

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1529705



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
adapta-backgrounds-0.5.3.1-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL
7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-95fb606a17

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1529593] Review Request: adapta-gtk-theme - An adaptive Gtk+ theme based on Material Design Guidelines

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1529593



--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System  ---
adapta-gtk-theme-3.93.0.56-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL
7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-b81e1bdce9

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1529593] Review Request: adapta-gtk-theme - An adaptive Gtk+ theme based on Material Design Guidelines

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1529593

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |MODIFIED



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1514274] Review Request: twitter-twemoji-fonts - Twitter Emoji for everyone

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274



--- Comment #20 from Neal Gompa  ---
(In reply to Peter Oliver from comment #19)
> So, can I confirm the status of this review?  Are we waiting for nototools
> to be split out into its own package?  Is there anything else blocking
> review?

No, that's pretty much it. Once the split out nototools is approved, then I can
proceed with the review.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1482524] ansible-kubespray - Ansible library for kubernetes installer needed to install tripleo openstack on top

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1482524

Matthias Runge  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|hgue...@redhat.com  |mru...@redhat.com



--- Comment #12 from Matthias Runge  ---
(In reply to Bogdan Dobrelya from comment #11)
> I'd love to make it into Fedora repos, just will need then some assistance
> with a package review request, @Matthias :)

I'm happy to support you there Bogdan. If anything comes up, feel free to ping
me.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1428202] Review Request: sirikali - GUI front end to encfs,cryfs, gocryptfs and securefs

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1428202



--- Comment #23 from Damian Wrobel  ---
Raphael,

Two minor issues:

Please remove %post, %postun and %posttrans sections as per [4] - now it's
obsolete. There was a change recently in that area (see History section of
[4]).

Please remove %attr(644,-,-) in %files section as it shouldn't be used unless
you need to set non-default value. BTW 0644 is already set in %install section
and is the default one as per [5].

Rest looks ok.

[4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Scriptlets#Icon_Cache
[5] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_Permissions

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1482524] ansible-kubespray - Ansible library for kubernetes installer needed to install tripleo openstack on top

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1482524



--- Comment #11 from Bogdan Dobrelya  ---
I'd love to make it into Fedora repos, just will need then some assistance with
a package review request, @Matthias :)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1533801] Review Request: ghc-call-stack - GHC call-stacks backward compatibility

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1533801



--- Comment #4 from Jens Petersen  ---
Thank you, Robert-André

https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/4214

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1482524] ansible-kubespray - Ansible library for kubernetes installer needed to install tripleo openstack on top

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1482524



--- Comment #10 from Bogdan Dobrelya  ---
Thank you Matthias, that helps!
Will do and post an update shortly

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1534137] Review Request: fluxcapacitor - run programs without blocking on syscalls

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1534137

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |MODIFIED



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1534137] Review Request: fluxcapacitor - run programs without blocking on syscalls

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1534137



--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System  ---
fluxcapacitor-0-4.20180114git0b6a11b.el6 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora EPEL 6.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2018-ea3af33607

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1535384] Review Request: tomb - a CLI tool to manage encrypted storage

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1535384

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
 Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841
[Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a
sponsor
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1535291] Review Request: rubygem-terminal-table - Simple, feature rich ascii table generation library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1535291

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||zebo...@gmail.com



--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - These two files are incorrectly marked as executables. Remove the executable
bits and notify upstream:

rubygem-terminal-table.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/gems/gems/terminal-table-1.8.0/lib/terminal-table/table.rb
rubygem-terminal-table-doc.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/gems/gems/terminal-table-1.8.0/README.rdoc


Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


= MUST items =

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 16 files have
 unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/bob/packaging/review/rubygem-terminal-table/review-rubygem-
 terminal-table/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/gems,
 /usr/share/gems/doc
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Ruby:
[x]: Platform dependent files must all go under %{gem_extdir_mri}, platform
 independent under %{gem_dir}.
[x]: Gem package must not define a non-gem subpackage
[x]: Macro %{gem_extdir} is deprecated.
[x]: Gem package is named rubygem-%{gem_name}
[x]: Package contains BuildRequires: rubygems-devel.
[x]: Gem package must define %{gem_name} macro.
[x]: Pure Ruby package must be built as noarch
[x]: Package does not contain Requires: ruby(abi).

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages.
 Note: Package contains font files
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).

[Bug 1535292] Review Request: vagrant-openstack-provider - Vagrant plugin for OpenStack provider

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1535292

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||zebo...@gmail.com



--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - License files should be included with the %license macro, not doc:

%doc CHANGELOG.md
%license LICENSE
%dir %{vagrant_plugin_instdir}
%license %{vagrant_plugin_instdir}/LICENSE

Also in this case, the second license file will overwrite the first one since
they have the same name, if they are different, please rename the second one to
avoid this. IMHO they're the same and you should just include %license
%{vagrant_plugin_instdir}/LICENSE

 - Group: is not needed in Fedora. See:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags_and_Sections

 - Please add a comment explaining what the patch does/why it is needed

 - This script should probably be executable:

vagrant-openstack-provider-doc.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/vagrant/gems/gems/vagrant-openstack-provider-0.11.0/stackrc 644
/bin/bash 



Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


= MUST items =

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
 upstream sources. No licenses found. Please check the source files for
 licenses manually.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[-]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/vagrant/gems/doc,
 /usr/share/vagrant/gems, /usr/share/vagrant
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages.
 Note: Package contains font files
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
 justified.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 

[Bug 1514274] Review Request: twitter-twemoji-fonts - Twitter Emoji for everyone

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1514274



--- Comment #19 from Peter Oliver  ---
So, can I confirm the status of this review?  Are we waiting for nototools to
be split out into its own package?  Is there anything else blocking review?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1535384] Review Request: tomb - a CLI tool to manage encrypted storage

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1535384

Iwicki Artur  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||fed...@svgames.pl



--- Comment #1 from Iwicki Artur  ---
>Patch0: tomb.patch
Ideally, patches should have some description of what they it. It can either be
part of the patch name (like "tomb-do-not-use-usr-env.patch"), or a #comment in
the spec.

>%make_install PREFIX=/usr
Use "%{_prefix}" instead of "/usr".

As a style remark, %install is usually put before %files. It might also be good
to write a simple comment like "# Nothing to build" in the %build section. The
%description could also be a bit longer; the text on the Tomb website seems
friendly enough for this purpose.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1482524] ansible-kubespray - Ansible library for kubernetes installer needed to install tripleo openstack on top

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1482524

Christopher Brown  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC|chris.br...@redhat.com  |
  Flags|needinfo?   |



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1482524] ansible-kubespray - Ansible library for kubernetes installer needed to install tripleo openstack on top

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1482524

Matthias Runge  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mru...@redhat.com



--- Comment #9 from Matthias Runge  ---
I stumbled upon this by coincidence.

Any reason for this not to be in Fedora?

Build fails with 

RPM build errors:
File not found:
/home/mrunge/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/ansible-kubespray-2.3.0-1.x86_64/etc/kubespray/ansible.cfg
File not found:
/home/mrunge/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/ansible-kubespray-2.3.0-1.x86_64/etc/kubespray/inventory/group_vars/all.yml
File not found:
/home/mrunge/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/ansible-kubespray-2.3.0-1.x86_64/etc/kubespray/inventory/group_vars/k8s-cluster.yml

- IMHO it would make more sense to name it kubespray. The project is named that
way.

- The roles are installing into /usr/local/share, which conflicts with FHS

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#No_Files_or_Directories_under_.2Fsrv.2C_.2Fusr.2Flocal.2C_or_.2Fhome.2F.24USER


- Please update Source0 to 
https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/kubespray/archive/v%{upstream_version}.tar.gz#/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz

(additional 'v' in URL and this will save the tarball to a more descriptive
name, rather than using v2.3.0.tar.gz)

- I'd remove the vendor tag

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1535384] New: Review Request: tomb - a CLI tool to manage encrypted storage

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1535384

Bug ID: 1535384
   Summary: Review Request: tomb - a CLI tool to manage encrypted
storage
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
 Component: Package Review
  Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org
  Reporter: theblainest...@gmail.com
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org



This is my first package and I am seeking a sponsor.

* SPEC URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/blainester/tomb/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00702333-tomb/tomb.spec

* SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/blainester/tomb/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00702333-tomb/tomb-2.5-2.fc28.src.rpm

* Description: Tomb is a zsh script that uses commonly shared components such
as cryptsetup to make it simple to generate encrypted storage folders.
(https://www.dyne.org/software/tomb/)

* Fedora Account System Username: blainester

It is already on COPR: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/blainester/tomb/

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1531955] Review Request: seqan2 - C++ library of efficient algorithms and data structures

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955



--- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System  ---
seqan2-2.4.0-0.3.20180103git8a875d.fc26 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-ad26aa004e

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1531955] Review Request: seqan2 - C++ library of efficient algorithms and data structures

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|MODIFIED



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1531955] Review Request: seqan2 - C++ library of efficient algorithms and data structures

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955



--- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System  ---
seqan2-2.4.0-0.3.20180103git8a875d.fc27 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-e1b5369a2c

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1341662] Review Request: fedora-developer-portal - Offline Fedora Developer Portal

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1341662
Bug 1341662 depends on bug 1454951, which changed state.

Bug 1454951 Summary: Review Request: python-bitcoin - Python Bitcoin Tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1454951

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1454951] Review Request: python-bitcoin - Python Bitcoin Tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1454951

Jonny Heggheim  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Last Closed||2018-01-17 04:29:01



--- Comment #7 from Jonny Heggheim  ---
(In reply to Charalampos Stratakis from comment #6)
> A note here. It seems upstream just killed the project.
> 
> https://github.com/vbuterin/pybitcointools/commit/
> f768fd8be0baab178d35c9d2c6c60422828d649c

Thanks, I will close this review

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1454951] Review Request: python-bitcoin - Python Bitcoin Tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1454951

Charalampos Stratakis  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||cstra...@redhat.com



--- Comment #6 from Charalampos Stratakis  ---
A note here. It seems upstream just killed the project.

https://github.com/vbuterin/pybitcointools/commit/f768fd8be0baab178d35c9d2c6c60422828d649c

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org